Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film
View Poll Results: How do you feel about the FCC's actions in this case?
I support it 100% - someone has to think of the children!
0
0%
The FCC is just doing their job, but this is a tad much.
3
16.67%
Against it 100% - more pointless Morality policing - ABOLISH THE FCC!
13
72.22%
Depends on the buttocks
2
11.11%
Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll

FCC protecting the Children once again....

Old 01-27-08, 06:30 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Formerly known as "brizz"/kck
Posts: 23,420
FCC protecting the Children once again....

Good to see they are on top of things...like an episode of NYPD blue from 2003

We can thank them, however, for ruling unequivocally that a woman's butt is a "Sexual Organ"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080127/tv_nm/indecency_dc

FCC levies "NYPD" indecency fine

By Brooks Boliek Sun Jan 27, 2:53 AM ET

WASHINGTON (Hollywood Reporter) - In a sign that the federal airwaves police may ratchet up their campaign against racy programming, the FCC on Friday determined that a woman's naked backside is indecent enough to net ABC a proposed fine of $1.43 million.
ADVERTISEMENT

The fine proposal, announced late Friday, comes as much of the regulatory regime the commission uses to fine stations is under judicial review.

Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate said Friday's action puts broadcasters on notice.

"Our action today should serve as a reminder to all broadcasters that Congress and American families continue to be concerned about protecting children from harmful material and that the FCC will enforce the laws of the land vigilantly," she wrote in a statement accompanying the fine notice. "In fact, pursuant to the Broadcast Decency Act of 2005, Congress increased the maximum authorized fines tenfold. The law is simple. If a broadcaster makes the decision to show indecent programming, it must air between the hours of 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. This is neither difficult to understand nor burdensome to implement."

In its decision the FCC ruled that the February 25, 2003, episode of the ABC program "NYPD Blue" in which a nude woman is surprised by a young boy as she prepares to shower is too much for primetime broadcast TV.

"We find that the programming at issue is within the scope of our indecency definition because it depicts sexual organs and excretory organs -- specifically an adult woman's buttocks," the FCC wrote. "Although ABC argues, without citing any authority, that the buttocks are not a sexual organ, we reject this argument, which runs counter to both case law and common sense."

The commission levied the maximum fine it could at the time against ABC. It then multiplied the $27,500 fine by the 52 ABC stations that aired the episode during Central Standard Time and Mountain Standard Time.

ABC said the FCC erred in its decision Friday.

"'NYPD Blue,' which aired on ABC from 1993-2005, was an Emmy Award-winning drama, broadcast with appropriate parental warnings as well as V-chip-enabled program ratings from the time such ratings were implemented," the company said. "When the brief scene in question was telecast almost five years ago, this critically acclaimed drama had been on the air for a decade and the realistic nature of its storylines was well known to the viewing public. ABC feels strongly that the FCC's finding is inconsistent with prior precedent from the Commission, the indecency statute and the First Amendment, and we intend to oppose the proposed fine."

Obscene speech has no constitutional protection, but indecent speech does. Under the law, FCC rules and court decisions, the commission can fine broadcasters for airing indecent speech outside of the 10 p.m.-6 a.m. safe harbor.

Material is indecent if it "in context depicts or describes sexual or excretory activities or organs in a patently offensive manner as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium." Under current law broadcasters face a fine of $325,000 per incident.
What say you? Are buttocks too sexy for primetime? Is the FCC out of it's freaking mind?

Last edited by HistoryProf; 01-27-08 at 06:34 PM.
HistoryProf is offline  
Old 01-27-08, 06:34 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Bacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: on somone's ignore list
Posts: 20,888
ahem

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=523597
Bacon is offline  
Old 01-27-08, 06:34 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 122,478
This deserves 2 threads for how absurd it is, but....
http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=523597
Red Dog is offline  
Old 01-27-08, 06:35 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Legend
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Formerly known as "brizz"/kck
Posts: 23,420
That's TV Talk....this is Politics. I want to know what people think of the FCC's actions and how they reflect on the federal government asserting itself as America's morality police.

ETA, and this one has 100% more poll!

Last edited by HistoryProf; 01-27-08 at 06:40 PM.
HistoryProf is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.